Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lydia Smart

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify per consensus‎. Less Unless (talk) 11:28, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lydia Smart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. Not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to meet WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:NSKATE. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and England. Shellwood (talk) 10:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP - Multiple time competitor at British National Championships, ISU international events including the 2023 World Championships. Highly likely to be competing at the Senior International level for several more years yet. Coverage exists from reliable sources such as the BBC, Statistics and results available from the International Skating Union and British Ice Skating, and news sources such as the Blackpool Gazette and Cardiff Journalism, as well as factual information sourceable from the subjects own website. Per WP:BEFORE and WP:ATD "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." This article is new and still being worked on, personally I am currently away until the end of the month but will be adding more content to this and related articles on my return (had to respond to AfD to ensure there's an article to update when I get back). WP:DINC and WP:IMPATIENT seem relevant here - it was less than a week from the removal of the old PROD tag to this AfD submission. DISCLOSURE: I am the original article creator. Jambajuiceuk (talk) 22:52, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think it's more like WP:TOOSOON rather than WP:IMPATIENT. Merko (talk) 18:15, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep alternatively Draftify Borderline case. Reliable sourcing is a bit thin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Random person no 362478479 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:18, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep Draftify, the Blackpool Gazette appears to be the only source that could pass as significant coverage. Might be WP:TOOSOON. Merko (talk) 18:17, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify. The Blackpool Gazette article seems to be on her youth activities, and as it's local coverage would be disqualified. The piece is also directly promoting her gofundme which is another strike. The subject does not yet meet GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify or delete Insufficient coverage to meet WP:NBIO. MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.